I don't think the article makes enough sense to be called socialism. It sounds more like what would happen if you gave a 12-year-old a copy of Google's mission statement and a Wikipedia article about Joseph Schumpeter and said, "Misunderstand all of this, then write a thousand words about it."
Where did you see that insinuation? Can you point me to the place where you saw the conclusion about socialism? I feel like you are reading way too much into it. Why attribute something the authors didn't intend?
I think most socialist that read theory know this, that is why they say socialism is more the road from capitalism to the never reachable utopia called communism.
At least that is how i have understand their explanation, das kapital is still on my reading list but it such a big book its kind of intimidating to start and given the limited amount of free time i have xD
The first thing when I open that link is a report on "Why Socialism Fails". I'm not gonna trust that as a non-biased source. Show me a peer-reviewed study rather than a blog post please.
Reading tracts on socialism by Mises is similar to learning about capitalism from Marx or mainline Christianity from the Church of Latter Day Saints. I'm not the biggest fan of Wikipedia social science articles, but on the whole I'd still see it as a better starting point than someone beating straw men to death in order to promote their own fringe agenda.
Well I read a long way before I didn’t get to anything about socialism, and then I got to the part distinguishing a democracy and a republic and... there is none because a republic is just any rule without monarchy. So I gave up. I was hoping this would be of interest as a socialist, I hope it will be to people who aren’t already.
But if you don't have the time for that, just read the intro paragraph.
reply